Scream (1996)
Dir:  Wes Craven
Cast:  Neve Campbell, Skeet Ulrich, Matthew Lillard,
Rose McGowan, Courteney Cox, David Arquette,
Jamie Kennedy, Drew Barrymore, Liev Schreiber
Rated R, Approx:  111 Minutes
Dimension Films DVD
"Don't Answer The Phone.
Don't Open The Door.
Don't Try To Escape."
Craven's 'comeback' film is little
more than an obvious self-referential
thriller disguised as a slasher film.
How this came to be known as a deconstructuralist masterpiece, I'll never understand.  For some reason the majority
of film goers seemed to think that poking fun at the 80s slasher cliches was something new.  Not only had it been
done before, it had been done much better before -
Sleepaway Camp 2 and Popcorn were far more enjoyable
homages...shit, even
Saturday the 14th and Student Bodies had some redeeming values!  Even more astounding
is the fact that the once great Wes Craven was behind the camera.
Examining the codes that serve as a basis for many contemporary horror films sounds like a fun idea.  With Craven
at the helm though, this comes off as nothing more than self indulgent drek.  
Scream has no sense of compatibility
with the films that it's trying to parody, instead it places itself on a pedestal as it play like the be all and end all of
slasher films.  It's trying to put down horror movies while at the same time distancing itself from them.  The 'in jokes'
are easily some of the stupidest lines I've ever heard in a movie.  These resulted in legions of know it all smart-asses
running around with the remarkable knowledge that Dee Wallace Stone was in
ET and The Howling and most
importantly that Jason
wasn't the killer in the original Friday the 13th.  Worst of all is the spill over audience for the
classic,
Halloween.  Where exactly were all these fans the year before?  If Craven hadn't driven his point home
enough at this point, he sticks in a line about all the
A Nightmare on Elm Street sequels suckling (I know he claims
this was in Kevin Williamson's script beforehand, but I just don't believe that...or if it was, I bet he loved it).  I wonder
why there was no mention of his own sequel to
The Hills Have Eyes?  Honestly, if Craven thinks so little of the
genre that made him what he is then he should leave and try not to let the door hit his ass on the way out.
The story itself concerns a group of hip young kids who pass the days partying and exchanging witty banter.  Throw
in a mysterious killer, a
Scooby-Doo like ending and that's pretty much it.  The lowlights include Jamie Kennedy as
the movie expert and Matthew Lillard at his most annoying.  Kennedy spends the movie running around spouting off
the 'rules' of a horror movie.  His extensive knowledge though, sounds as if his genre research was based on the
tepid horror selection of a Blockbuster Video.  Lillard is just about unbearable, delivering some of the worst lines in
the worst manner.
Craven:  Same old act.
I find it funny that Craven so readily disowns the horror genre here as if he's matured as a filmmaker...yet he refuses
to grow up.  He's trying to direct teen movies in his late 50s and hide behind a deconstructuralist concept.  All he
really succeeded in doing was creating a showcase for the pretty faces of the WB type stars and infesting the genre
with a wave of self referential smart ass teeny bopper slashers (most of which involved Kevin Williamson in one way
or another).
Technically, I have to concede that Craven knows what he's doing.  This movie is not ineptly filmed.  As far as
compliments go, that's all I can muster for this one though.  I'll take the tragic Mari Collingwood over Sidney Prescott
any day.  While Mari was interesting not only as a character but as multi-layered symbol of innocence and youthful
experimentation; Sidney is an embarrassingly one dimensional introverted brat.
As I look for what exactly about this movie rubs me the wrong way so much, I find it important to note that it is not the
overall slickness of the direction that bothers me.  I would not expect Craven to have kept the raw power of
Last
House on the Left
or The Hills Have Eyes throughout his career.  I understand that people evolve as artists, but
this is no excuse for this mess.  Take George A. Romero for instance - his career spans from
Night of the Living
Dead
to Jack's Wife to The Dark Half to Bruiser.  Granted he hasn't hit the bullseye with every film, but his films
are none the less always compelling and thought provoking.  The savage feel of
NOTLD is nowhere to be found in
the recent slickly produced
Bruiser but he never sinks to the level of insulting the genre and directing feature length
Party of Five episodes.
In the end, we are left with a remarkably influential film that I despise.  Craven spends nearly two hours knocking the
derivative nature of the horror film but somehow never finds the time to admit that
Scream in pretty derivative in its
own right.  The infamous opening sequence is blatant in stealing shots almost directly from Mario Bava's '
The
Telephone
' segment of the classic Black Sabbath.  The end is even worse, almost a completely shameless
knockoff of
Happy Birthday to Me!
This is a movie that I feel very strongly about, but I've also run into many genre fans that I respect very much that like
this movie a lot.  As cranky as I seem with this review, I would like to stress the idea that it is not intended as a
personal slam to anyone who likes the movie.  I do not consider anyone 'less' of a horror fan for liking it...perhaps
they see something in it that I'm missing.
1 washed up director out of 5
review: Dr. Spector 2/27/02